AVMA to vote to take a stand against raw feeding

[mschauer]

I'll still send the email and the letters, but I'm seriously blown away. Totally beyond my comprehension that they'd consider doing this.

I think it is understandable why they would take such a position. Remember the AVMA is a professional organization. It exists in part to give it's members guidance on issues relevant to their profession. If they believe raw feeding can be harmful to pets then it is understandable that they would take an official stand against it. And remember too the policy as quoted allows for an exception if the food was been treated for pathogens.

 

[cinderflower]

I thought the AVMA had already taken a stand against raw feeding?

We'll have to see how it plays out. Commercial raw foods might the affected if some jurisdiction uses it as a reason to ban the sale of raw pet foods but I don't see how it would affect me feeding my homemade raw. It's not like they can do anything to stop me.

 i know, huh.  the meat nazis will burst into your house.  "ve vill COOK all ze food first!"  it might change the way it's labeled/marketed for sale but they will never ban selling raw meat.

 

[mschauer]

 i know, huh.  the meat nazis will burst into your house.  "ve vill COOK all ze food first!" 

 

[carolina]

Laurie, it's the AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) not the AAFCO.

which is why I have been saying..... well, they already do that.....

"discourage the feeding to cats and dogs of any animal source protein that has not first been subjected to a process to eliminate pathogens because of the risk of illness to cats and dogs as well as humans."

The above quote doesn't strike as anything new to me :dk:

 

[mschauer]

But I don't see how an AVMA position would translate into any kind of potential law.

The suggestion was that it might be used as an *excuse* for legislation not that it would automatically result in any legislation. Trixton, of course, makes such legislation sound a lot more likely than it is.

 

[kittylover23]

the AVMA Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine will vote to create a policy to "discourage the feeding to cats and dogs of any animal source protein that has not first been subjected to a process to eliminate pathogens because of the risk of illness to cats and dogs as well as humans."

Don't most commercial raw brands already use HPP? It wouldn't be a huge change IMO. But it really ticks me off that they're trying to turn people off of raw feeding as much as possible. Only one of my current vets supports me feeding my cats commercial raw, and I seriously don't think he will stop promoting a raw diet just because the AVMA tells him too. Hopefully, more vets will have the same way of thinking.

 

[detmut]

i think irradiation is the best way for pet and human raw meats.

 

[carolina]

the AVMA Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine will vote to create a policy to "discourage the feeding to cats and dogs of any animal source protein that has not first been subjected to a process to eliminate pathogens because of the risk of illness to cats and dogs as well as humans."

Don't most commercial raw brands already use HPP?

No... Only Nature's Variety, some of the Primal line, and Stella & Chewy

 

[emilymaywilcha]

Emily, you are so offbase with this analogy, I can't let it go. I don't want to derail this thread, but comparing the discussion to the right to mutilate a cat vs. feeding a species-appropriate diet is just wrong.
And the AVMA does not SUPPORT declawing, and their official position SHOULD lead vets to discourage it and provide education as to alternatives.
In THIS instance, an AAFCO official position against raw feeding would lead vets to continue to discourage raw feeding, and give them "ammunition" that sounds "official."
**************************
IMO, ultimately this is likely just one more fence to jump in helping people overcome their fears about feeding raw.
No, what scares me is what is going to happen with the AAFCO and the FDA, and the AAFCO potentially having more actual potential regulatory authority.

I was not comparing a perfectly acceptable way to feed a cat to digital amputations. We all know they cannot be compared. I was pointing out the same logic - the AVMA has no business telling us how to take care of our cats - is used for supporting onychectomies. Therefore I wanted a better reason to oppose the AVMA's decision than "the AVMA can't stop us anyway." Does that make sense?

I assume many pet food companies will consider this decision an opportunity to make people think commercial raw is bad for cats so they are better because their meat is cooked.

 

[feralvr]

Don't most commercial raw brands already use HPP? It wouldn't be a huge change IMO. But it really ticks me off that they're trying to turn people off of raw feeding as much as possible. Only one of my current vets supports me feeding my cats commercial raw, and I seriously don't think he will stop promoting a raw diet just because the AVMA tells him too. Hopefully, more vets will have the same way of thinking.

The only commercial raw companies that use HPP are Primal, Nature's Variety and Stella and Chewey's. I am worried now how this will affect commercially made raw pet food and if all of the companies will be required to use HPP. :dk: I am absolutely going to send letter's to the AVMA and express my views on this proposed policy. I think it is outrageous that they will have control over the raw pet food manufacturers if this passes.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

The only commercial raw companies that use HPP are Primal, Nature's Variety and Stella and Chewey's. I am worried now how this will affect commercially made raw pet food and if all of the companies will be required to use HPP.

What is so bad about HPP? I thought that was supposed to be a good thing.

 

[melesine]

Considering the utter crap ingredients in most of the "food" vets sell why would anyone trust them for dietary advice anyway. I've been feeding raw for over 5 years, their opinion means nothing. 

 

[Willowy]

The AVMA doesn't have control over the raw food manufacturers :dk:. Or any other pet food manufacturer. And never will. They're a medical association, not a governing body; they have no real power over anything, not even their own members.

It's an opinion from a medical association. . .and the AVMA's opinion hasn't seemed to make much difference on other issues. It's a non-issue, really.

 

[melesine]

I do not mean this in an offensive way. But I don't understand your responses. Your posts translate to me as: "you already feed a prey model raw diet, the heck with everyone else who hasn't gotten there yet, and may wish for the support of vets and commercial product availability". Surely you don't mean to sound that way. Can you explain what you mean?

I've never had a vet make a negative statement about raw feeding to me. Having said that, I wouldn't rely on the average vet for nutrition info, any of them that might be against raw obviously are uneducated as to the nutritional needs of cats and dogs. There are a minority of vets that take the time to educate themselves, but the ones I've heard of are all raw feeders. 

 

[melesine]

The suggestion was that it might be used as an *excuse* for legislation not that it would automatically result in any legislation. Trixton, of course, makes such legislation sound a lot more likely than it is.

What legislation, my animals eat the same meat I do, bought from the grocery store. It's not like they are going to come to my house and monitor me to make sure I don't feed it to my cat. 

 

[mschauer]

The suggestion was that it might be used as an *excuse* for legislation not that it would automatically result in any legislation. Trixton, of course, makes such legislation sound a lot more likely than it is.

What legislation, my animals eat the same meat I do, bought from the grocery store. It's not like they are going to come to my house and monitor me to make sure I don't feed it to my cat. 

This was in reference to commercially produced foods.

 

[violetxx]

This is absurd! Sounds to me like they are trying to discourage pet owners from feeding raw now that its starting to get popular.

I highly doubt that the purpose of "removing pathogens" for human and pet safety is a legitimate reason for becoming a regulating body and forcing HPP on commercial raw brands. I mean have their been that many human or pet illnesses/deaths that have been caused by pathogens in raw? Feeding raw includes the risk of contamination in humans just like working with human-grade raw meat does, so why care now?

Secondly, there are large amounts of bacteria in kibble (and no regulation here.. hmm coincidence?) Cats have short intestines for a reason, raw food is not meant to stay in the intestine long enough to cause problems and cats have adapted to feed on bacteria ridden meat. Of course there will always be strains that may cause illness, but I would much rather risk feeding my cat an species appropriate diet than put my cat on kibble for the rest of its life, as an owner we get to chose! Why isn't the AVMA warning us against kibble?

Thirdly, the pet food industry adds so many deliterious ingredients to their kibbles and canned foods that cause countless cats to get sick and even die, but feeding raw may cause the opposite, cats thriving and staying healthy which means less trips to the vet = less money for the pet food industry... I'm sorry they do not care about pathogens.. if they were so scared of cats getting sick off food, they would regulate the addition of carbohydrates in pet food, but they don't because pet food companies would never allow it.

Ultimately this is just going to result in less people feeding raw, I know personally it would freak out my mom (pathogens already do), but this is the exact opposite of what people should be thinking because currently raw is the healthiest choice for cats on the market.

My money's on the pet food industry lobbying the AVMA. In the same way big pharma, and corporations control the FDA.

 

[Willowy]

I highly doubt that the purpose of "removing pathogens" for human and pet safety is a legitimate reason for becoming a regulating body and forcing HPP on commercial raw brands.

Where is everybody getting this part? Is it in one of the links and I missed it? The AVMA is not a regulating body and never will be.

I'm fairly certain the American Academy of Pediatrics has some sort of opinion about what you should feed your kid. Does anybody know what it is? Does anybody care? Are there any laws about it?

 

[emilymaywilcha]

Anyone who saw my thread "Don't listen to Tufts University!" can see why vets like kibble and hate raw: the pet food companies sponsor veterinary colleges. Tufts is one of very few vet schools that teaches animal nutition three of the four years. One problem is how animal nutrition classes are set up: they are usually in the agriculture department, not the veterinary college. No wonder vets don't learn much.

 

[detmut]

and as much as we may sometimes disagree with them, the AVMA is not the enemy